OC position
Comments
-
I agree that Pete played a role in the WR rotation despite constantly hearing that the position coaches are in charge of that.Kingdome_Urinals said:
Terrible response, except for the very end. John Ross was good because he was healthy for a full year, had a great defense, a decent QB, a superb TB, and plenty of nice scoring opportunities. A good WR coach, in the sense that they can communicate effectively with kids, is better than a terrible one, for sure.RoadDawg55 said:
Absolutely idiotic post. Disagree about OL coach. That’s an important role and I would much rather have a great OL coach than an average one.Kingdome_Urinals said:OL coach and WR mean very little in the scheme of things. It's all on CP.
When have you heard of a team that hired a better WR coach and got dramatically better on offense? Never. All WR coaches do the same shit. Some just coach actually good WRs.
We got drastically better with Bush Hamdan as our WR coach. Ross came back and was much improved and it was night and day with Pettis. I don’t think it was all because of him, but it helped having him instead of Pease.
They do the same shit, but the coach needs to get his guys assignment sound, playing with confidence, focused, always seeking to improve, etc.
Teachers mostly teach the same thing. History is history, but some teach it better than others.
The only thing you are right about is that it is all on CP. he does need to hire good coaches and that’s very debatable at this point.
But the tone starts at the top. Adams was not in complete control of the WR rotations this year, for instance, it was Pete's stupid system and seniority principles that got everyone constipated.
Same goes for OL in my opinion. Chip Kelly's system at Oregon was largely fool-proof not because of a great OL coach, but because the system was schemed and drilled to perfection at the top.
That said, we only have the results of a position coach’s units to make judgements on. The WR group was a weakness all year. Adams was bad in year one. I don’t mind him getting another year and he deserves it because of his recruiting, but his group has to play better this year. If they don’t, he should be shown the door. -
-
Bachellia was a contributor at the end of the season last year because his speed and lack of size was utilized correctly (and sparingly). Using him as a #2 and the main homerun threat seems to me like an OC decision.RoadDawg55 said:
I agree that Pete played a role in the WR rotation despite constantly hearing that the position coaches are in charge of that.Kingdome_Urinals said:
Terrible response, except for the very end. John Ross was good because he was healthy for a full year, had a great defense, a decent QB, a superb TB, and plenty of nice scoring opportunities. A good WR coach, in the sense that they can communicate effectively with kids, is better than a terrible one, for sure.RoadDawg55 said:
Absolutely idiotic post. Disagree about OL coach. That’s an important role and I would much rather have a great OL coach than an average one.Kingdome_Urinals said:OL coach and WR mean very little in the scheme of things. It's all on CP.
When have you heard of a team that hired a better WR coach and got dramatically better on offense? Never. All WR coaches do the same shit. Some just coach actually good WRs.
We got drastically better with Bush Hamdan as our WR coach. Ross came back and was much improved and it was night and day with Pettis. I don’t think it was all because of him, but it helped having him instead of Pease.
They do the same shit, but the coach needs to get his guys assignment sound, playing with confidence, focused, always seeking to improve, etc.
Teachers mostly teach the same thing. History is history, but some teach it better than others.
The only thing you are right about is that it is all on CP. he does need to hire good coaches and that’s very debatable at this point.
But the tone starts at the top. Adams was not in complete control of the WR rotations this year, for instance, it was Pete's stupid system and seniority principles that got everyone constipated.
Same goes for OL in my opinion. Chip Kelly's system at Oregon was largely fool-proof not because of a great OL coach, but because the system was schemed and drilled to perfection at the top.
That said, we only have the results of a position coach’s units to make judgements on. The WR group was a weakness all year. Adams was bad in year one. I don’t mind him getting another year and he deserves it because of his recruiting, but his group has to play better this year. If they don’t, he should be shown the door.
Fuller I blame Adams much more for. You can't let a pencil-armed kid be your #1 receiver.
-
bananasnblondes said:
Originally I would have agreed with this but I learned recently from "Sub K" on the BDTW podcast that the o line performance has nothing to do with the o line coach as long as he is recruiting well. In this case, poor o line performance is the fault of the running back coach and offensive coordinator. If, however, the o line coach is deemed a poor recruiter, then any deficiencies in o line production fall at his feetRoadDawg55 said:
Absolutely idiotic post. Disagree about OL coach. That’s an important role and I would much rather have a great OL coach than an average one.Kingdome_Urinals said:OL coach and WR mean very little in the scheme of things. It's all on CP.
When have you heard of a team that hired a better WR coach and got dramatically better on offense? Never. All WR coaches do the same shit. Some just coach actually good WRs.
We got drastically better with Bush Hamdan as our WR coach. Ross came back and was much improved and it was night and day with Pettis. I don’t think it was all because of him, but it helped having him instead of Pease.
They do the same shit, but the coach needs to get his guys assignment sound, playing with confidence, focused, always seeking to improve, etc.
Teachers mostly teach the same thing. History is history, but some teach it better than others.
The only thing you are right about is that it is all on CP. he does need to hire good coaches and that’s very debatable at this point.
This is pretty much the bipolar analysis that BDTW is built onbananasnblondes said:
Originally I would have agreed with this but I learned recently from "Sub K" on the BDTW podcast that the o line performance has nothing to do with the o line coach as long as he is recruiting well. In this case, poor o line performance is the fault of the running back coach and offensive coordinator. If, however, the o line coach is deemed a poor recruiter, then any deficiencies in o line production fall at his feetRoadDawg55 said:
Absolutely idiotic post. Disagree about OL coach. That’s an important role and I would much rather have a great OL coach than an average one.Kingdome_Urinals said:OL coach and WR mean very little in the scheme of things. It's all on CP.
When have you heard of a team that hired a better WR coach and got dramatically better on offense? Never. All WR coaches do the same shit. Some just coach actually good WRs.
We got drastically better with Bush Hamdan as our WR coach. Ross came back and was much improved and it was night and day with Pettis. I don’t think it was all because of him, but it helped having him instead of Pease.
They do the same shit, but the coach needs to get his guys assignment sound, playing with confidence, focused, always seeking to improve, etc.
Teachers mostly teach the same thing. History is history, but some teach it better than others.
The only thing you are right about is that it is all on CP. he does need to hire good coaches and that’s very debatable at this point. -
I’m just not sure I buy the Lashlee hype.FremontTroll said:Lashlee would be a great hire. It’s not settling for Eason if you have a guy like Lashlee on the hook.
That being said if Eason is gone anyway I agree it makes sense to wait a week and see if someone you like even more comes along. Risky though because Lashlee or whoever else was the guy might no longer be available.
He could be good ... but his comparable experience at Auburn did not go great.
I think it’s a bit of a risk when you bring in somebody from a lower level -
Tequilla said:
I’m just not sure I buy the Lashley hype.FremontTroll said:Lashlee would be a great hire. It’s not settling for Eason if you have a guy like Lashlee on the hook.
That being said if Eason is gone anyway I agree it makes sense to wait a week and see if someone you like even more comes along. Risky though because Lashlee or whoever else was the guy might no longer be available.
He could be good ... but his comparable experience at Auburn did not go great.
I think it’s a bit of a risk when you bring in somebody from a lower level
Is there an example of a name as a good coordinator in a current position At a high level school that realistically would come here? -
AtomicDawg said:Tequilla said:
I’m just not sure I buy the Lashley hype.FremontTroll said:Lashlee would be a great hire. It’s not settling for Eason if you have a guy like Lashlee on the hook.
That being said if Eason is gone anyway I agree it makes sense to wait a week and see if someone you like even more comes along. Risky though because Lashlee or whoever else was the guy might no longer be available.
He could be good ... but his comparable experience at Auburn did not go great.
I think it’s a bit of a risk when you bring in somebody from a lower level
Is there an example of a name as a good coordinator in a current position At a high level school that realistically would come here?
-
This OC hire is no different than any other OC - the head coach remains responsible for the results
Of course we will hate whoever gets hired. Until we don't.
-
Agreed. Sometimes though it is just as simple as hiring the right person and gtfootw. See the chipRaceBannon said:This OC hire is no different than any other OC - the head coach remains responsible for the results
Of course we will hate whoever gets hired. Until we don't.
Kelly and Lincoln Riley type hires.
That being said most oc’s are obsessed with making the passing games look good and need a head coach to put them in place. -
-
Make urban meyer say no. His offenses at Utah and ohio state we’re pretty good.GrundleStiltzkin said:AtomicDawg said:Tequilla said:
I’m just not sure I buy the Lashley hype.FremontTroll said:Lashlee would be a great hire. It’s not settling for Eason if you have a guy like Lashlee on the hook.
That being said if Eason is gone anyway I agree it makes sense to wait a week and see if someone you like even more comes along. Risky though because Lashlee or whoever else was the guy might no longer be available.
He could be good ... but his comparable experience at Auburn did not go great.
I think it’s a bit of a risk when you bring in somebody from a lower level
Is there an example of a name as a good coordinator in a current position At a high level school that realistically would come here? -
Depends on if you think ferndale is a high level school.AtomicDawg said:Tequilla said:
I’m just not sure I buy the Lashley hype.FremontTroll said:Lashlee would be a great hire. It’s not settling for Eason if you have a guy like Lashlee on the hook.
That being said if Eason is gone anyway I agree it makes sense to wait a week and see if someone you like even more comes along. Risky though because Lashlee or whoever else was the guy might no longer be available.
He could be good ... but his comparable experience at Auburn did not go great.
I think it’s a bit of a risk when you bring in somebody from a lower level
Is there an example of a name as a good coordinator in a current position At a high level school that realistically would come here? -
What about rod smith? Aggressive, attacking, up tempo offense. Knows how to win in the desert and can score atleast 10 points against Cal.
-
Fuller was the best returning WR. He had a disappointing year. They really fucked up not getting Puka involved early and taking so long to let Bynum get a real chance and actually be targeted. Spiker should have been more involved as well.haie said:
Bachellia was a contributor at the end of the season last year because his speed and lack of size was utilized correctly (and sparingly). Using him as a #2 and the main homerun threat seems to me like an OC decision.RoadDawg55 said:
I agree that Pete played a role in the WR rotation despite constantly hearing that the position coaches are in charge of that.Kingdome_Urinals said:
Terrible response, except for the very end. John Ross was good because he was healthy for a full year, had a great defense, a decent QB, a superb TB, and plenty of nice scoring opportunities. A good WR coach, in the sense that they can communicate effectively with kids, is better than a terrible one, for sure.RoadDawg55 said:
Absolutely idiotic post. Disagree about OL coach. That’s an important role and I would much rather have a great OL coach than an average one.Kingdome_Urinals said:OL coach and WR mean very little in the scheme of things. It's all on CP.
When have you heard of a team that hired a better WR coach and got dramatically better on offense? Never. All WR coaches do the same shit. Some just coach actually good WRs.
We got drastically better with Bush Hamdan as our WR coach. Ross came back and was much improved and it was night and day with Pettis. I don’t think it was all because of him, but it helped having him instead of Pease.
They do the same shit, but the coach needs to get his guys assignment sound, playing with confidence, focused, always seeking to improve, etc.
Teachers mostly teach the same thing. History is history, but some teach it better than others.
The only thing you are right about is that it is all on CP. he does need to hire good coaches and that’s very debatable at this point.
But the tone starts at the top. Adams was not in complete control of the WR rotations this year, for instance, it was Pete's stupid system and seniority principles that got everyone constipated.
Same goes for OL in my opinion. Chip Kelly's system at Oregon was largely fool-proof not because of a great OL coach, but because the system was schemed and drilled to perfection at the top.
That said, we only have the results of a position coach’s units to make judgements on. The WR group was a weakness all year. Adams was bad in year one. I don’t mind him getting another year and he deserves it because of his recruiting, but his group has to play better this year. If they don’t, he should be shown the door.
Fuller I blame Adams much more for. You can't let a pencil-armed kid be your #1 receiver.
We should have had no true #1 and spread the ball around. It’s harder for DB’s to defend multiple guys with different games. And like we have anytime we have had a good WR or TE, we forced the ball to them. Eason would stare Hunter Bryant down and wait for him to get open on his shallow crosses.
If we had some true studs, it would be different, but we didn’t, or at least they weren’t ready to fill the #1 spot from game one. -
In what way did it not “go great”?Tequilla said:
I’m just not sure I buy the Lashlee hype.FremontTroll said:Lashlee would be a great hire. It’s not settling for Eason if you have a guy like Lashlee on the hook.
That being said if Eason is gone anyway I agree it makes sense to wait a week and see if someone you like even more comes along. Risky though because Lashlee or whoever else was the guy might no longer be available.
He could be good ... but his comparable experience at Auburn did not go great.
I think it’s a bit of a risk when you bring in somebody from a lower level -
Hard no to any Rich Rodriguez disciples. He was a prodigy in his day but he didn’t evolve.Bread said:What about rod smith? Aggressive, attacking, up tempo offense. Knows how to win in the desert and can score atleast 10 points against Cal.
-
Year 1 gets to the National Title game losing to Florida StFremontTroll said:
In what way did it not “go great”?Tequilla said:
I’m just not sure I buy the Lashlee hype.FremontTroll said:Lashlee would be a great hire. It’s not settling for Eason if you have a guy like Lashlee on the hook.
That being said if Eason is gone anyway I agree it makes sense to wait a week and see if someone you like even more comes along. Risky though because Lashlee or whoever else was the guy might no longer be available.
He could be good ... but his comparable experience at Auburn did not go great.
I think it’s a bit of a risk when you bring in somebody from a lower level
By Year 4 the seat under the Gus Bus got so hot that he sacrificed Lashlee taking back the play calling back.
So yeah, reason for some concern -
Fetters gotta Fetters
"...could be..." Pumpeii could be a home run hire too. -
What a faggot. Kellen Moore could be a home run hire, or he could be worthless. I could be a home run president of the United states, but the wise money would back someone with a little more on the resume that leads one to believe so.GrundleStiltzkin said:Fetters gotta Fetters
"...could be..." Pumpeii could be a home run hire too. -
LOL at Fetters telling everyone how to approach a potential OC hire. The guy has no idea what to look for.
-
but wait, now he's leading a hashtag for #TheMooreYouKnow!
-
Who could say no to this face?
-
He's also a complete insensitive, dick. Having a laff at people's real pain on Twitter? Classy...chuck said:
What a faggot. Kellen Moore could be a home run hire, or he could be worthless. I could be a home run president of the United states, but the wise money would back someone with a little more on the resume that leads one to believe so.GrundleStiltzkin said:Fetters gotta Fetters
"...could be..." Pumpeii could be a home run hire too.
-
My question is, can he beat Idaho with his offense?
-
Can Fetters properly credit us as the “ask yourself why” source or is he just going to plagiarize our shit fucko?
-
I just came here to call Fetters a dumb fuck fat fuck and you took that away from me.GrundleStiltzkin said:Fetters gotta Fetters
"...could be..." Pumpeii could be a home run hire too.
-
I hate him already as much as I hate every word typed from fatters fat fingers.RaceBannon said:This OC hire is no different than any other OC - the head coach remains responsible for the results
Of course we will hate whoever gets hired. Until we don't. -
I don't know why, but @CFetters_Nacho_Lover never sounded funnier than just now.
-
It’s a shitty witty knockoff of ask yourself whyGrundleStiltzkin said:
